[ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> john: from a political point of view obama's dome program is meant to prevent the wing from criticizing it. well, the right wing is criticizing anyway and so is the left. we'll tell you why you should. imagine what they can do for a president's legacy. tomorrow opens the doors of presidential library which means we can look forward to the dick cheney hunting lodge, and the roman polanski daycare clinic. and the republicans continue to criticize the president in the

wake of the boston marathon bombing. don't worry my creative friend the predent is fully authorized to have a copy of my dead goat. today is the birthday of. and it took eight years to pick the new pontiff which was embarrassing for the vatican because he vote against the touch voting machines which president bush kept winning. this is "viewpoint." >> john: good evening, i'm john fugelsang. this is "viewpoint." this month activists are activists are staging national days of action to stop

u.s. drone warfare. yesterday the u.s. committee took their own action, a hearing on drone warfare. here is the detail as senator durbin saw it. >> the use of drones has made targeted killing more efficient and less costly in terms of american blood and treasure. there are however long-term consequences when the airstrikes hit civilians. >> john: consequences like growing hatred of americans and of america in countries where drones have been deployed. now president obama insists it's the best weapon we have in the war against al-qaeda and it's affiliates. in april lindsey graham told the rotey club, i quote we've killed 4700. sometimes you hit innocent people i hate that, but we're at war. actually we have not declared war in this country since 1941.

that's the first time an american official put a number on the casualties from the drone war. chair dianne feinstein insists that the casualties in that war are in single digits year by year. but according to the u.k. based bureau of universalism drone strikes may have killed as many as 3,500 people in pakistan. among them perhaps 500 civilians and nearly 200 children. in yemen where drones have been less active the casualty count could rise up to 4450 and nearly 50 civilians and ten children. yemeni activists who spent a year in an american high school describes how his people react the to a recent drone strike. >> when they think of america they think of the drones that hover over their heads ready to

fire missiles at any time. what the militants previously failed to achieve one drone strike achieved in an instant. the drone strikes have the face of america to many yemenis. >> john: meanwhile senator rand paul who filibustered the any for 13 hours over over the possibility that drones could be used on american soil against americans. >> if someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, i don't know care in a drone kills him or a policeman kills him. >> john: i didn't know summary execution of armed robbery suspects walking out of a liquor store is a libertarian value. on tuesday he read a statement that read in part. i quote:

>> john: for more i'm pleased to be joined by the brilliant representative barbara lee democrat from california, member of the appropriations committee and member of progressive caucus. thank you for being on "viewpoint." >> thank you. >> john: you attended the drone hearing on tuesday. how unusually is it for members to cross the aisle to the other chamber for hearings and were you surprise that the white house declined to send a witness. >> first i need to commend senator durbin for his leadership. he wants to get to the bottom of this in terms of the legal basis of the use of drones and really the implications of counter terrorism as well as the constitutional implications. members of the house sell democrat gosell--seldom go to the house to listen in. but i felt it was important to listen to what the witness has to say. i was disappointed that the

administration did not send the witness but i tell you the witness who is were there were phenomenal. i'm consequenced if we do no pre---i'm convinced if we do no do not repeal this, bell' see we'll see perpetual war forever. it will create more angry more hostility toward our country. the young man from yemen. thank you for playing part of his testimony. he received scholarships from the state department. this man is pro usa and thinks village is decimated by the use of drones. he wassatedhe wassate--he was educated here and now he's telling us how terrible this is and how angry people are getting. >> john: it is true the bribes we may pay it won't help the loved ones of those who were

killed by drone attacks to become american haters. you asked for the legal legal rationale of the drone war. in your opinion, is that going to be enough for the administration to justify continuing this action? >> i think what's important now is that first the administration answer these questions. secondly, it's very important that we have a public debate. of course the president is our commander in chief and he's responsible for protecting our country. he's the top person who has these very awesome responsibilities, and he's doing a phenomenal job, but that does not mean that congress should not be in the loop. we have a system of checks and balances, and so we have to insist that the constitutional rights and requirements of members of congress are actually inactive.

that means we have to have a debate. we did not have a debate in in 2001. this blank check has been used over and over and over again to justify so many actions that the american people don't even realize that these actions which now have caused us in as president said in his inaugural state perpetual warfare, and we have got to stop it. i have a bill that would repeal that resolution, and i have to get many cosponsors for that, but i think the debate is beginning, and i want the house to also have hearings just as senator durbin held in the house of representatives to really look at the legal justification for the use of drones. >> john: that's the big question. what is the legal justification? senator durbin said ours is a democratic society where the rule of law prevails. do overseas drone strikes as they're carried out now violate the rule of law that we all grew up with? >> there is a difference of opinion on that. most believe that it was that

resolution the 2001 resolution that gave then president bush, now president obama the broad authority to use force any time, any place anywhere if he or she deems it's connected to 9/11. that was you such a blank check that it's scary to think first of all how it's been used and how it could be used in the future. that's primarily the understanding that many of us have that they're using as the legal justification. that is just down right wrong. we never have debated the use of drones to engage in targeted killing. >> john: congresswoman i commend you on this action of this issue. i would never ask to you speculate or go inside the president's head but do you think he's aware of the damage this program has already doing to his legacy? >> first of all, this is a very smart president, he has definitely reshaped america's imagineimage and role in the world. this president really gets it. he knows what his

responsibilities are as commander in chief. i just have to say it's a heavy heavy lift that he has, but i'm sure that he understands that we have to move forward as members of congress and make sure that these checks and balances are in place, and that our democracy prevails. so i believe that he understands this. they're looking at these issues. they're looking at the legal justifications now and i'm confident that we're going to see a new direction. >> john: from your lips to the white house ears. representative barbara lee thank you for coming on "viewpoint." >> thank you. >> john: it's a pleasure to be joined by mr. rick unger. a gallup poll found that two-thirds feel that america should use drone strikes overseas. does this give the president what he needs. >> it might in the short term but this is such a complex problem and people don't see it

for what it is. you have got a legal problem that they never established the property legal framework. you've got an international legal problem. we don't have conventions that don't apply and maybe they should. for old school warfare we had rules. there were rules of how you treated civilians, how you treated the sick and injured and we have none of that when it comes to this. and this is a big part of the issue. then you have the p.r. problem. so you've got these multi levels of problems, and to be honest i feel like once they device the technology for this, nobody took the time to see it through. they thought wow what a great way to kill terrorists. it is a great way to kill terrorists. but there are all of these issues that are going to come home to roost and they're starting to. >> john: we have to acknowledge, it keeps the american boots off the ground. >> it saves money and it saves

lives. >> john: well, it saves american lives. you can make up all kinds of new language to couch what you do, enemy combatants because we can't call them prisoners of war because then we have to acknowledge the geneva convention. >> and by the way, we have not come up with a definition of combatant. >> john: a slim majority don't want the u.s. terror suspects he overseas, americans citizens, to be killed by drones. and those who support the drones being used here. >> what it really does is show just how little the public understands the issue. because in in fact, it should probably be reversed. look, the one case you can make is al awalaki the american citizen. we never established the legal framework for the rare situation

where we have an american citizen abroad who we cannot capture. he'll continue to do what he does god knows what will happen, or we have to do what we did. all you need to do is establish a legal framework, and it could be done. whether it's trial in abstentia. they could charge you with a crime and if you don't show up, they'll still have his trial. >> if they determined him guilty that would be at incentive. >> exactly. you would have the american public on the side of that, and you would have much more of a defense on the world stage. we gave him a trial. now if you want to capture him in pakistan and turn him over, that's cool, too but we can't sit by and do nothing. domestically there is no excuse. we can always capture someone on u.s. soil. >> john: that's the question for

oversees. didn't seal team six prove we can go over there and capture a guy-- >> but we knew the guy we were able to grab. first, the resource, how many years and money? you can't doe that with every potential terrorist. >> john: a lot of obama supporters don't like to hear this being discussed and we'll do exactly that. but when he said he wanted congress to create a new architecture around this. >> the truth is this is not a terrible idea, we should have legal architecture but it's nowhere near enough. you can't create a worldwide architecture for this without involving the rest of the world. you know, all we're doing--if congress comes up with rules do you think that will make someone in yemen feel better when we blow up their village? >> john: it will make towns who

used to like us not like us any more. nownow it was mentioned that they wouldn't care if a man was blown up by a drone coming out after robbing a liquor store. >> what got rand paul start start the filibuster, it was his answer to the question are there any circumstances that you would use a drone on american soil. he answered, i could imagine 9/11 or pearl harbor, but that was not enough for rand paul. it was unbelievable. he wouldn't accept 9/11 or pearl harbor? i thanked him for giving me one of the best stories i could write in years. it was remarkable.

>> john: it does show in american politics amnesia is an airborne virus. >> it's extraordinary and you should see how people are defending him. to the credit of libertarians, i mean, as you looked at my article and you saw the things people were saying, you find, one, they don't understand this issue at all. two, it doesn't matter what you say. they're going to defend him. >> john: it's an issue that are you nights the real liberals and real conservatives. in the case of the real liberals they're fighting for this president's legacy. rick ungar as charming as always. for michelle bachmann, faith is an uncertain future.

>> john: welcome back to "viewpoint." 9 thing of the day tonight is the overreaction of the day. it's a great one. it happened on wall street tuesday when the dow jones fell a per perilous 143 points because of one mall feat. hackers hit the associated press and said that the white house had been hit and the president was injured. the dow between noon and 2:00 ended up looking like the president's third term was just announced. when you look at who hacked the

twitter feet, feed, you may want to look at who bought a lot of stock between noon and 2:00. and who stirred the spoon it had to be michelle bachmann, has been one of the most prominent and controversial voices of the extreme right. and now she and her beloved tea party could be facing extinction. as bipartisan immigration legislation moves through congress it may signal the interest of votes and leave the far right behind which would include include mexico ms. bachmann she we're pleased now to welcome two "viewpoint" jim graves, democratic opponent to michelle bachmann in 2012 and again

in 2014. what a pleasure to have you on the air tonight. >> great to be with you. >> john: you describe congressman bachmann as an embarrassment and what is wrong with this country. as a comedian, that's what i admire about her. >> i did not call it an embarrassment, but the people call her that. she does epitomize everything wrong with congress, john. she divides, separates, throws hand grenades at people's characters. rather than going after the solutions of the problems she goes after the people. that's what is wrong with congress. we need to find a way to bring people together and get to the real solutions. she just happens to do the opposite. she divides people, and she encourages headlines that she doesn't create anything but headlines. she doesn't really create solutions. that's why i'm running against her. >> john: i think that's why you captured the imagination of so many people in america's sane community.

you were able to take the fight of ms. bachmann in her home district, and lost by less than 1%. how would you represent minnesota's sixth district differently than congressman bachmann today. >> first and foremost i wouldn't attack the government. the government is us. when i bring a skill set that brings people together. i mean in business if all you do is separate, there is an outcome called bankruptcy. you have to bring people together, find solutions come together and bring in all your assets to make things happen. what michelle bachmann has been doing is just the opposite. she's creating gridlock rather than success. she's creating bad feelings, ill feelings. rather than bringing people together. what i do is i could sit down and have a beer with anybody and try to find a solution. every party everybody in congress has something to contribute. let's find what they can contribute, take the best of

that bring it together and make it happen. with bachmann you're never going to get there. >> john: let's say that we're in the ultimate universe why you got her seat in 2012. what about the gang of eight the bipartisan group in the senate. >> i think it's a great bill that we have to push through. right now we have 11 million people living in this country in a shadowy economy, a lot of them are indentured servants essentially. i've got hundreds of employees who are immigrants. these people come to the country. they've done it legally. they've gone through the green card process. if we can afford to give these other people 11 million folks that really want to follow the rules, you know, stay out of trouble with the law willing to comply with our constitution, our language, come on board it's going to be good for the economy, it will be good for our society. it will be good for everybody.

i totally embrace the legislation of the pathway to citizenship. >> john: and we saw the rather mild gun background check defeated in the senate where they wouldn't even allow it to have a vote. if it had made it to the house how would you have voted? >> i would have voted for it. i'm a second amendment advocate as well as most people in this country. but at the end of the day gun show loopholes and 90% of the people in this country were supportive of that legislation. it's really unfortunate again. epitomizes what is wrong in congress. we can't get congress to come together. we can't get the senate to come together. we need who have the people skills who understand the art of the deal. we got to make these deals. that's something that this country wanted and yet the people in the senate would not even talk about it. >> john: considering the

gridlock in d.c. now and so many republicans are terrifieds a primary campaign in terms of the far right primary are you willing to have that compromise that you have in the business world, is it possible in the d.c. world. >> i think it is if you bring people together, and do it in a way that you actually respect the other person's opinion, and then try to bring them along and be willing to compromise yourself, we do it in business all the time. we don't care if you're republican or democrat in business. we just have a business objective. we come together, and we get it done. i really do believe that this country can move forward. i believe if we bring people in congress who haven't lived there their whole life, and we need people that have the skills that have the experience, that can actually change the direction that we see in congress right now. it's broken. and it seeds to be change. >> john: jim graves will be challenging michelle bachmann again in minnesota's sixth district in 2004.

we wish you luck and hope to bring you back on the show. >> i appreciate it. >> john: have a great evening. meanwhile in north carolina folks have a way to stay in power. just make it harder for some people to vote. you won't believe it. that's coming up.

you. >> john: today on wtf america we're in florida and we go to kathleen high school in beautiful lakeland florida where attempts to form a gay-straight alliance club was thwarted by school officials who were afraid that organizations such a this could lead to a society overrun by well-adjusted kids not permanently scared by their high school experiences. errory teal and brenna pellend both 17 had been working to establish this club since november 2012. but school officials were worried that this would distract them from normal high school activities. back in my days in high school

we had a gay organization but it was called theater club. but what is wrong about kids who are not openly admitted who are but friends who are strong enough to be supportive of gay class maids. kathleen florida i guessed hard to take a stand against bullying when the bullies are not high school kids but adult who is are afraid of certain political parties. coming on to me all the time now. (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. you would rather deal with ahmadinejad than me. >>absolutely. >> and so would mitt romney. (vo) she's joy behar. >>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking?

>> john: voter i.d. laws, the perennial solution in search of a problem. just passed in north carolina state this afternoon. that's just the beginning. proposals have been cascading from that state's republican-dominated legislature to make it harder to vote. not for everyone but for some.

the senate is working on a bill that would shrink early voting by a week and end same-day region station but part of that bill is about those darn liberal-leaning educated college students who like to read just a little bit too much. if they vote where they live and at their school addresses instead of their homes mom and dad under this bill cannot claim them as dependents. senator, north carolina republicans would raise taxes specifically on families who are already straining to put their kids through college. why? well, the voter integrity project which supports this bill spells it out with uncharacteristic honesty. if other states pick up this legislation, it will shift the landscape of college town voting all across the nation and may even put college states like massachusetts back into play. in other words the good thing about this bill it will put the states back into play for republicans.

let's bring in reverend dr. william j. barber, president of north carolina's naacp who spent the day at the house debate and penda hair codirector of the advancement prong who has been following these bills. thank you for joining us. >> thank you good evening. >> john: what happened before these bills. >> we saw the leaders of the republican party really attempt to be the george wallaces of the 21st century. they engaged in tyranny. they passed to suppress the vote vote. we've had the highest per capita voting rate in any state in the union in the last few elections and they know that the south is changing. they're trying to stop what i call the thirdly construction.

they passed a voter document that is unnecessary because we already had signature access, and we have not had any evidence of voter fraud. their claim of fraud is fraudulent itself. this is an tempt to stop progress and it's so wrong and we're going to find it with everything we have. >> john: we've seen admissions like this across the country that tend to target minorities poor folks or seniors and in this case it's targeting college students. there has been a lot of public support for voteer i.d. laws. now my mom and brother they don't agree but is there that much support for this? >> i do not believe that is true. when voters find out this is about politicians who are manipulating the rules to stop people from voting because they would not vote oh for those

particular politicians they do not support this highly restrictive and probably illegal voteer i.d. there is simply no justification, the public doesn't want it as reverend barber said this is not about stopping voter fraud. in fact, it's really just about stopping voting. >> do you think the conservatives would be more angry about this. it's a policy that will raise taxes and waste money on a problem that's not a real problem but reverend as for the student registration law the clear majority of voters as ms. hair indicated say they're against it. what is driving the legislature to do stuff like this? >> well, i think we have to look at history. we look at what happened to block the first reconstruction in 1800. if you look at when richard nixon wanted to roll back the silvercivil rights, this group gets

into hoves and what do they do? they attack the state. they cut medicaid. theynow they're trying to roll back voter rights because they know the demographics have shifted. they cannot win a fair election. the only way they can win an election is to rig it. they want to take back early voting, sunday voting and with students you should know that today 36 private schools in north carolina. they voted today not to allow the voteer i.d. from those schools to even be allowed. >> john: you're kidding, can you say that again? that's a pertinent pound. >> there are 36 private schools in north carolina, and many of the legislature went to those schools. they voted today if you go to a private school, the i.d. at that private school is not allowed. if you're in north carolina state, you're not allowed. if you're at a private school, it wouldn't. but if you're at unc it would. so they promised to be about jobs. instead they have been about

division they've been about disparity and creating more discrimination. it's radical because they are so afraid that an electorate made up of blacks and whites and lgbt will radically shift the south. if it radically shifts the south it will radically shift the nation. they will stop it in north carolina because north carolina tends to be progressive. if you stop it here, then you can undermine it across the rest of the south. >> john: it might be easier just to win on the issues. ms. hair have you seen an increase in voting proposals latery? >> absolutely. since 2010 this has swept across the country. and it has been brought on as i said by politicians who gain control of state legislatures and want to keep control by rigging the election and changing the rules. sothey have been involved in litigation in missouri wisconsin, texas others have

brought lawsuits in south carolina. all of these laws have been stopped. either temporarily or permanently by the court. i think it's because they've seen through the thin justification that has been asserted for stopping people from voting. >> john: is there any way ms. hair this would save money as the proponents say it would? >> no, it would cost the states. the state's own budget committee said it will cost over $3 million, and we believe it would be much higher for them to actually implement it and try to get the i.d. to every voter and every potential voter. we don't even think it's possible to do that. but i think it would be several several millions of dollars just to try at a time when the money could be better spent on people who have real needs. >> john: reverend let me give you the last word. people who are trying to reduce early voting say it will stave money. but with the student voting proposal in place, a voter in integrity project said it's just

an excuse that equals short term residents like teachers and soldiers who use absentee ballots. does that make sense? >> none of them make sense because they're illogical to start. they said they'll accept an affidavit under the penalty of perjury will you but they won't accept it it for this. what this law does, it violates section one of the north carolina constitution, it violates section six that says the legislature has no authority to qualify voters in this way. it violates the 15th amendment because of the right to vote and it violates the fundamentals of our democracy, and it will cost us not only in dollars but it will cost us because it will cut at the heart and soul of our

democracy. we intend to fight it. we intend to be at the courts, we're also going to be engaging in active civil disobedience. they will not be doing this in the dark. this coming sunday we're meeting with clergy and people across the state to plan and announce several acts of civil disobedience. this is just wrong. it's reverses bad ideology, and it must be stopped. >> john: thank you for your service and thank you for joining us on "viewpoint"." >> thank you. >> thank you. >> john: the george w. bush library opens tomorrow our panel of non-experts joins me next.

>> john: welcome back to "viewpoint." on the social media today i asked all y'all whattal y'all think george w. bush's legacy is. i wish i had a whole hour to read all the comments we got on

facebook and twitter. franciscus moles aeterna wrote his greatest legacy is that he's so undone the constitution by expanding the executive powers that no president democrat or republican would want to curtail them back to where they should be during their administration. franciscus, i hate to say this, but i'm afraid your right and many of president obama's actions bear this out. do you remember a time when habeas corpus was a basic right. if you have a comment for the show tweet us at "viewpoint" ctv or john fugelsang or use the hashtag "viewpoint" or post it on our facebook page. the memory of your average american is shorter than a mickey rourke comeback. and so we shouldn't be surprised when the results of a new poll conducted this week in

anticipation of tomorrow's opening of the george w. bush lib, 47% of voters have a favorable view of his presidency and 50% disapproving of the job he did. so the economy really is getting better. this when bush left office in january of 2009 when his approval rating was 33% positive and 66% negative pitch. at this rate we'll look back at the bush presidency with 100% approval, but fortunately we'll be dead by this. i have act with me actor and comedianco-immediate rain pryor author of the book "jokes my father never taught me: life love and loss with richard pryor," and comedian dean obeidallah,

creator of the dean's report.com. and lee camp author of the book "moment of clarity." all right let's start with this new poll. bush, the approval rating is 14% higher now than when he left office. is amnesia an airborne virus in this country? are we getting stupider or are people getting nicer and more forgiving. >> pot is more prevalent. that's the only answer. this is insane. how do you forget? he hasn't changed. he's still a lizard-dinned, lizard-brained half wit. how do you forget that. >> john: rain, lee makes some good and profound points. history should be judge of his presidency. how do you think people of the year 2113 will think of w.?

>> i think they will hide under a rock rather than think about this president period. what i think is funny in the first place is that i just--i really believe that george w. bush, the fact that there is even a library the man can't even talk. the man can't read. so i'm just--yeah he can't even msn--he doesn't keep track of his own history, the truth of it. america today, and the reason why his ratings are higher now is we've become very white again. >> john: you think with obama? >> i do. i think we're more white and racist than the days when my parents were protesting. >> john: what are your thoughts? >> i think in 100 years the chinese of this country will look back and say thank god. i think comediccally president bush getting a library is an

oxymoron. once point, to be honest, president bush left at where people are still suffering economically. >> john: the difference being we were losing 800,000 jobs on january-- >> i agree. i'm not saying that, but statistically we're still below where he left office in unemployment. there are people struggling for years. i guess some of that is reflected in this poll. >> john: that's a fair point. now bush gave an interview to c-span where he said he and dick cheney are cordal. there seems to be a falling out. what was the cause of the falling out and will we get the whole story. >> bush wants to say-- >> john: it has to be scooty libby. that's the burden on dick cheney. >> i think it makes perfect

sense that they don't talk any more. when there is a tv show and there is a puppeteer olding holding up the puppet. >> john: that speaks to the scooter libby issue. from everything you hear it was in the second term that bush became his own man and would not pardon scooter libby and cheney never foregave him for it. >> bush said he wouldn't even take phone calls from cheney in the end. he had frozen cheney out. >> john: bush was a great gift for comedians and your dad have a take on w.? >> you know what, no. he didn't. he just thought that he was--he just thought the world needed to change period. that's where my dad was at. he was afraid of what's happening now that really it would become white again. there is a very strange crux in our history and political system with the gun control this, that

that, it's freaky. >> john: and in a same interview, he hopes his brother jeb will run in 2016. now considering it was brand name recognition that got bush in the white house in the first place, is that what conceivably doom any jeb bush presidency? >> i think it could hurt him but i think frankly the republican party is in such disarray he could be the leading candidate for that party. he'll knock out rubio from florida. you know what, i think most americans are open-minded. i don't think they're going to say because your brother is a complete idiot and a horrible president i think you are too. i think he could win. >> oh, it's horrific just to even think about it. bush clinton bush, clinton bush. >> john: in country when we started this country to get away from this type of power and then

we possibly go back to bush again. what would you have done when faced with the invasion of iraq, the crisis of katrina it sounds like they're trying to take things a bit out of context. do i invade the country run by the dictator thug my father armed or do i contain the country that my thug father armed. >> your country is bombed by 19 saudis. dosaudis. you have people drowning in new orleans, do you put a horse trainer in charge. >> go into a room, and you don't let anybody out of the room. >> john: i would like to see his paintings there? it seems that he has this image of him washing away something he might have done.

>> pontius pilate. we finally found what he can do. his aptitude is painting. >> if hitler had been better he wouldn't have gone into politics. i'm not comparing bush to hitler, fox news. i also would say i would support a library of laura bush because only in america would a librarian marry an illiterate. we have more of obama's legacy and we're going to talk about the drones. don't go away. hershey's simple pleasures chocolate. 30% less fat, 100% delicious.

>> john: welcome back to "viewpoint." one more quick question for the panel of power and truth. should the u.s. be using drones to kill folks overseas. >> no, they should not. >> dean obeidallah. >> i would prefer that they keep them in overseas and not following american muslims. >> killing is not good without any kind of structure. that's wrong.

>> lee camp? >> there's one tried and true way to create terrorists, and that is to randomly bomb their countries. >> john: that's a very good point and that brings us to tonight's commentary. the problem with drones, president obama got to keep the nobel peace prize. but milli have a nilly had to give his award back. >> i'm asking to you keep making your voices heard keep holding me accountable. >> john: you got it, mr. president. now "viewpoint" we don't weren't accept blind allegiance, and some of us critique this guy because we care about him and his legacy. he has defended the use of drones to kill people including u.s. citizens as legal wise and ethical. but they refused to send in a witness to the senate judiciary

hearings on the legality of the drone program. it has been used dramatically since 2011. 2001. since then drones have been used to kill american citizens. in the next 16 years more than 20,000 drones will occupy air space. even if you accept the need of drones as the new normal, they save u.s. lives by keeping boots off the ground there is still reason to object. it's all part of a little formula called ibm. i for imminent. they are use a drone to kill someone who poses as imminent throat to the u.s. but there is a broader concept of imminent.

it meanssome believe you can kill you now. now b, it's for blow back. according to a joint study by stanford and nyu only one in 50 victims of drone attacks are militants. the rest are civilians or as cheney calls them, collateral damage. and finally m is for militant, the most abused word in the drone campaign. under current u.s. policy all military-aged males who live in a combat zone are considered to be militants. that's like saying going into a gay bar makes you a lady gaga fan.

what do you call the president who has killed thousands of muslims with drones. personally thrown palestinian state under the bus at the u.n. our right wing friends call him part of the muslim brotherhood. we know the right wing is not going to do anything about. the obama supporters who are mad at me right now for criticizing him. the obama supporters who refuse to criticize. remember what he said, hold him accountable. if the policy doesn't change and he continues to do this and he damages his own legacy by killing innocent civilians overseas you my friend, are morally authorized to walk around, find the president's nobel peace prize and direct quotation marks on it. with us, rain prior author of "jokes my father never taught

me." where are you playing? >> in new york. >> and dean obeidallah of the dean's report.com. and lee camp, commissioner for the comedic arts in the green shadow cabinet. good night mom we'll see you tomorrow. >> joy: tonight gwyneth paltrow is in trouble for marketing bikinis to children. at least now we know why she was starving her kids. it's bikini season. and plus we'll talk about the new book that blows the doors off the morning show wars. all of that and more tonight. [♪ theme music ♪] >> joy: reese witherspoon is in damage control mode following friday's arrest for disorderly conduct. joining me to talk about this